Linmark Associates, Inc. v. Township of Willingboro
431 U.S. 85 · Decided May 2, 1977 · Supreme Court of the United States
At a glance
Linmark Associates, Inc. v. Township of Willingboro was decided on May 2, 1977 unanimously (8–0). The Court reversed the lower court's decision. Justice Thurgood Marshall wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “Commercial speech, excluding attorneys” in the First Amendment area. SCDB records that the Court declared a municipal or other local ordinance unconstitutional.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 431 U.S. 85 · 97 S. Ct. 1614 · 52 L. Ed. 2d 155 · 1977 U.S. LEXIS 81
- Docket number
- 76-357
- Decided
- May 2, 1977
- Argued
- March 2, 1977
- Court era
- Burger Court
- Decision type
- Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Reversed
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party received a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 8–0 (unanimous)
- Majority opinion
- Thurgood Marshall
- Opinion assigned by
- Warren E. Burger
- How the case arrived
- Certiorari
- Issue (SCDB)
- Commercial speech, excluding attorneys
- Issue area
- First Amendment
- Legal provision
- First Amendment (speech, press, and assembly)
- Type of law
- Constitutional amendment
- Held unconstitutional
- A municipal or other local ordinance
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Liberal what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice William J. Brennan Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice Potter Stewart | Majority | |
| Justice Byron R. White | Majority | |
| Justice Thurgood Marshall | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
| Chief Justice Warren E. Burger | Majority | |
| Justice Harry A. Blackmun | Majority | |
| Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice John Paul Stevens | Majority |
Did not participate: William H. Rehnquist.
Full case caption
Linmark Associates, Inc., et al. v. Township of Willingboro et al.
SCDB identifiers: case 1976-096, docket 1976-096-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Commercial speech, excluding attorneys”
- Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, Inc.Altered precedentLaw held unconstitutional
- Friedman v. Rogers
- Bigelow v. VirginiaLaw held unconstitutional
- Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public Service Commission of New YorkLaw held unconstitutional
- Pittsburgh Press Co. v. Pittsburgh Commission on Human Relations
- Metromedia, Inc. v. City of San DiegoLaw held unconstitutional
Cases on the same legal provision: First Amendment (speech, press, and assembly)
- Splawn v. California
- Ward v. Illinois
- National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie
- Oklahoma Publishing Co. v. District Court in and for Oklahoma County
- Bates v. State Bar of ArizonaLaw held unconstitutional
- Zacchini v. Scripps-Howard Broadcasting Co.
Same Term, same area (First Amendment)
- Parker Seal Co. v. Cummins
- City of Madison Joint School District No. 8 v. Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission
- Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. Doyle
- Marks v. United States
- Oklahoma Publishing Co. v. District Court in and for Oklahoma County
- Wooley v. Maynard et Ux.Law held unconstitutional
Source: Supreme Court Database, 2026 Release 01 (data file dated September 8, 2026). Imported into CaseTrail November 5, 2026. Coverage: decisions from the 1946 through 2025 Terms. Methodology · Report an error